New 2nd Amendment Law Would Prevent States from Infringing on Citizens’ 2A Rights

The possibility of a dramatic change in many gun laws around the United States could take place in the very near future. That’s because legislation was introduced on July 31 by New York Republican congressman Chris Collins, which, if passed in Congress, would become law.

Known officially as H.R. 3576, the Second Amendment Guarantee Act (SAGA) reins in a state’s ability to supersede federal gun laws. In this case, it would prevent individual states from implementing stricter gun laws than those currently imposed by the federal government.

New Possibilities

In the past decade, few changes have been made when it comes to federal legislation regarding gun laws currently in place. Instead much of the activity has taken place at the state level, with an estimated 200 new gun laws instituted across the country.

One of the chief reasons for that inactivity stemmed from the makeup of Congress, with Republicans in control of only the House of Representatives while Democrats held the Senate and the White House. Last November’s elections gave Republicans full control of both the executive and legislative branches of government.

Provincial Concerns

Collins’ immediate focus when crafting this legislation was no doubt zeroed in on his home state, where the NY SAFE Act has been in place since January 2013.

Officially known as New York Secure Ammunition and Firearms Enforcement Act of 2013, the law was passed in the immediate aftermath of the Sandy Hook Elementary School tragedy one month earlier.

The SAFE Act immediately banned specific rifles and shotguns and expanded the scope of what constitutes an assault weapon. From that point, any gun that had a thumbhole stock, pistol grip or anything else that was deemed to be a military feature was relegated to being assigned to the sector of assault weapons. This ruled out many civilian-loved rifle models, like many of the popular AR-15s listed here.

Due to that designation, the gun either had to be registered or the elements noted above would have to be taken off. Both were seen by critics as an infringement on their constitutional rights.

A pair of New York State Assemblymen, Joe Errigo and Peter Lawrence, held a press conference the following day to express their support for the proposed legislation. The two politicians are sponsoring bills to repeal that law within New York itself. and took time to criticize the state’s governor, Andrew Cuomo, for signing it.

After the legislative proposal was announced, Cuomo took time to criticize it by saying it was a politically-based gambit by Collins. In addition, he indicated that a combination of special interests and gun lobbyists were enough to sway the 67-year-old congressman, who’s currently in his third term of representing New York’s 27th district.

Collins rejected such comments, stating that his main area of interest is to protect hunters and other sportsmen who are negatively affected by such laws. He also indicated that because a number of Democrats also enjoy such interests, they’ll help provide bipartisan support.

Likely Litigation

Still, if SAGA were to pass, the legality of it would be subsequently debated, with some New York politicians believing that it’s a violation of the 10th Amendment. That cites the fact that any power not given to the federal government in the Constitution is thereby given to states.

Other politicians believe that because the New York law is prominently mentioned within the legislation, that may cause legal roadblocks when a potential case reaches federal court. That’s because past edicts from the Supreme Court have decreed that all states must be dealt with in the same fashion.

The California Overreach

However, the scope of the new law also affects citizens in the other 49 states, with California also figuring prominently in this discussion. That’s chiefly because the state’s voters approved a new law last year: The Safety for All Act.

Among other things, it now requires purchasers of ammunition to undergo point-of-sale background checks and also bans residents from legally owning gun magazines of large capacity and assault weapons listed as military-grade.

In addition, that law now requires those convicted of crimes where firearms were prohibited to verify with the court system that their weapons had been surrendered. However, one aspect of the law would remain in place: handgun laws that local municipalities currently have in place.

Key States to Watch

Outside of California, Hawaii and Washington State are two of the few western states whose laws might be dramatically affected by passage of this proposed legislation. On the East Coast, states such as Massachusetts, New Jersey, Maryland, as well as Connecticut, would join New York in seeing their state laws pulled back in line with current federal laws.

Hawaii’s restrictive laws require that anyone purchasing a firearm in the state must undergo a background check that checks any convictions for felonies or violent crimes. Domestic violence is among those crimes listed among the latter group.

Taking Matters Into His Own Hands

Prior to the introduction of this legislation, Collins had indicated that in the wake of the June 14 shooting of Louisiana congressman Steve Scalise, he would be carrying a gun with him at all times. He noted that he’s held a handgun carry permit for more than three decades.

Collins also noted in a Washington op-ed on June 19 that only politicians in positions of leadership, like Majority Whip Scalise, are provided a security detail. That means that he and other politicians are more vulnerable to angry constituents and other individuals.

The belief of Collins is that not being able to interact with other citizens in the normal manner would undercut their effectiveness. He cited his father’s training when it comes to being responsible when it comes to any firearms.A

Potentially Cloudy Future

One of the problems that Collins may face in moving the legislation forward is the backlog of issues that Congress still needs to handle. The multiple attempts at crafting a new health care plan, coupled with tax reform and other concerns gives the bill an uncertain future, at least when it comes to the months ahead.

Another issue stems from the political reality of having to get a 60-vote majority in the Senate, something that’s difficult because of the nearly even makeup of that political body.

About the Author: Sam Bocetta is a retired ballistics contractor who worked for over 30 years as a Naval engineer, specializing in sonar technology and SWCC support. Past projects include the development of EWTR systems, Antifragile EW project, and development of Chaff countermeasures. Will now teaches at Washtenaw Community College in Ann Arbor, Michigan as a part time engineering professor. You can find more of Will’s work here at gunnewsdaily.com

Reader Interactions

Comments

actually it is not … for who gave authority over the gun rights of law abiding american citizens to the federal government??? The responsibility for gun oversight is NOT one of the limited enumerated powers…so all Federal Gun laws are unlawful.

The States are to submit to the US Constitution therefore they have no right to make their own.

I live in Jerry Brown’s people’s republic of California.. I strongly support any law that will end his quest to make us law abiding citizens into criminals. And to take our guns
I will help in any way!!
Jeff A Williams

Great to hear someone in office (Fed) is doing more than flapping his lips regarding Pro 2A rights. Hopefully, this measure will gain traction and become law before California declares all gun ownership against the law.

I can only reiterate previous quotes:
“I would rather have a fire extinguisher and not need it, than need it and not have it.
Same applies for my pistol.”
“When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns”
Criminal and ill doers do not abide by laws anyway.
Having a CC permit in my home state and travelling extensively for work, I must constantly be aware of individual state laws. After serving in the military, I believed I was a citizen of the UNITED STATES.

California has once again over stepped its authority we need to stand for are right to own guns we are a part of r the United States and we have constitutional rights whether the Republic of Jerry Brown agrees or not we have a right to protect our families whether it be an assault rifle or a pistol we all need to stand up for our rights and God bless America

I live on the California side of Reno. I can’t buy ammo in Nevada anymore or order it through the mail. I can’t get the revolver I want because it’s barrel is .75” longer that the gun Ruger sent to be tested by our state government my rights are being infringed! The SA is a fed issue and should be the same for all of us

You can do as you indicated, and we would also recommend communicating with our partner organization in Virginia – Gun Owners of America. They are heavily involved in lobbying Congress. http://www.gunowners.org

If the Constitution is the law of the land. Then why all this fighting over States making new gun law.
It seems to me that everyone who is against gun think laws can end gun rights. Also why do we need permits. A back ground check should be enough,the same with the type of gun we own.

I always though the same way John but where do we start you need every body to join in. Calif . thinks they are above The law so we still have our guns in locked box . and if I get stopped I wouldn’t put it past.Them to come up with some phoney charge and still hall me in for nothing. I have a hard time trusting anyone in calif. When it comes to doing the right thing .

The only right That’s null and void if you cross the wrong state line. Law abiding citizen on the Pa side of the bridge, Criminal felon on the NJ side. How, in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,!is this ok? ITS NOT!!!